What is "greenhushing"?

Greenhushing" is the practice of deliberately choosing to conceal ecological or environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG) references to avoid accusations of greenwashing.

This practice is becoming increasingly widespread among companies wishing to avoid criticism of their environmental sustainability from customers, investors and other stakeholders. Players in the textile and clothing industry are particularly exposed to this phenomenon, due to the intense scrutiny and criticism they receive.

Some investment funds have also opted out of being classified as funds with sustainable investment objectives to avoid criticism. It is important to note that greenhushing could be seen as the next step in the evolution of increasingly sophisticated greenwashing.

‍

What is Greenhushing?

Greenhushing" is a new term used to describe the practice of deliberately choosing to conceal environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG) credentials and actions to avoid accusations of greenwashing.

This can happen when companies are reluctant to share progress on sustainability initiatives and choose not to integrate sustainability into their brand communications. They prefer to make silent progress towards their goals. The term was first covered by consultancy Treehugger in 2020.

‍

What are the risks of Greenshushing?

• A loss of customer and investor confidence in companies that practice greenhushing, which can have negative economic consequences for these companies.

• A lack of transparency and visibility on companies' actual sustainability efforts, which can make it more difficult to move collectively towards a sustainable transition.

• A barrier to inspiration and emulation for other companies, who need to see the progress they are making in order to commit themselves to ambitious sustainability goals.

‍

What causes Greenhushing?

Fear of reproach or the "live happily, live hidden" attitude

It is possible that the concerns raised about the greenhushing attitude of companies are linked to a certain level of high expectations on the part of civil society and investors when it comes to communicating their commitments.

Management teams may feel cautious about declaring their progress on ecology or sustainability, for fear of failing to meet high standards or facing accusations of greenwashing.

It may also be a simple derivation of the current management philosophy: "'under-promise and over-deliver'.

The evolution of greenwashing

Planet Tracker has published a new report warning that corporate Greenwashing has become a "beast with many heads". Indeed, Greenwashing has become a complex, multi-faceted practice, encompassing many different types of activity aimed at disguising a company's real actions and commitments.

Greenhushing is one of the many heads of this beast, deliberately concealing environmental or sustainability information to avoid scrutiny.

Greenhushing can be seen as an evolved form of this practice, which now involves not communicating about a company's damaging environmental policies rather than simply presenting them in a favorable light. By hiding this information, companies can avoid criticism and pressure to improve their sustainability record, and it can be more difficult for consumers and investors to know whether a company is truly committed to the environment.

It's important to remember that transparency is essential to ensure the trust of investors and civil society, but it's also important to consider the challenges companies may face in collecting and sharing sustainability data.

Example of greenhushing 

For example, a company can reduce its carbon emissions by investing in renewable energies or by optimizing its industrial processes to be more energy-efficient. However, instead of highlighting these initiatives in its reports or communication campaigns, it chooses not to talk about them for fear of criticism on other, less successful aspects of its climate record.

In this case, although the company is making real progress in reducing its carbon footprint, it is practicing greenhushing by failing to share these efforts to avoid accusations of greenwashing or failing to meet high expectations on climate issues. This prevents stakeholders from gaining a full picture of the company's actions to reduce emissions, and slows progress towards greater transparency in the fight against climate change.

‍

What are the challenges facing companies when it comes to data collection?

Data collection costs

Collecting quality data on sustainability performance can be resource-intensive (human and financial), time-consuming and complex. Particularly for companies with extensive supply chains and global operations, when they are not equipped with an expert and specialized solution.

Data complexity

Extra-financial performance data can be complex to understand and use. Companies may find it difficult to identify the relevant CSR indicators to track, and to use them in their communications.

Non-standardization of data

There is a lack of standardization in the collection and reporting of sustainability performance data, making it even more difficult for companies to collect data.

Data uncertainties

Data uncertainties can also be an obstacle for companies wishing to communicate their sustainability performance. Companies may be reluctant to disclose data that could be called into question, which can lead to a lack of confidence on the part of investors and customers.

Regulatory pressure

Companies may also be reluctant to communicate their sustainability performance due to increasing regulatory pressure. Regulators may be more inclined to investigate misleading claims, and companies may prefer to avoid the risk of legal action by not communicating their performance.

‍

How can companies avoid Greenhushing?

To avoid greenhushing, companies need to adopt a more transparent and proactive approach to sustainable communications. This can include:

• Regular publication of reports on ecological initiatives, for example, sharing the CSR actions implemented or the results of your carbon footprint.
• The adoption of sustainability data collection and reporting tools, such as those offered by solutions like Beavr, to ensure greater accuracy and transparency in the information communicated.

Transparency is key to building trust with stakeholders. Companies must also recognize the challenges associated with collecting sustainability data, including cost, complexity and standardization. However, by investing in specialized solutions, they can overcome these obstacles and avoid the pitfalls of greenhushing.

Conclusion

In short, collecting quality data on sustainability performance can be costly, complex, difficult to standardize and uncertain. Companies may therefore be reluctant to communicate their performance to avoid cost, uncertainty and regulatory risk. This can lead to a lack of transparency and confidence on the part of investors and stakeholders. To meet all these challenges, companies can choose to invest in a specialized data collection solution like Beavr.